King Kong writes in this vein (2012/11/19 at 4:29 pm), copypasted below is one of his previous comments showing a typical example of his mentakfir – which I find to be despicable. But he keeps repeating this same method, again and again.

Oh, if you’re advocating Shu Zheng as a blogger you admire, then you’d also have to agree that he described your idol Hannah Yeoh “well & accurately” too.

He wrote, “[Hannah Yeoh] is an insane woman running down the street shouting curses….” (8 June 2011).

Shuzheng also wrote:

“In Shay Adora’s case, it isn’t that Hannah’s conduct was un-Chinese (who cares). Rather, it is taking out the baby to be laundered in public like showing off her new church, Sunday dress in the one hand and, in the other, she is waving to the world her sordid old Muniandy panties to be tossed out. That woman knows no shame. Perhaps, indeed, she is insane.” (11 June 2011)

In fact, Shuzheng called Hannah Yeoh an “insane woman” in several of his headlines and dozens of his stories.

The pseudonym ‘Peace’ is a misnomer and very Orwellian. To understand, read George Orwell’s novel 1984 which is a literary classic about how master propagandists convinced the brainwashed masses that ‘war’ is ‘peace’, and black is white.

In other words, the names they choose (like ‘Bangsa Malaysia’ or ‘Fairplayer’) are the exact opposite of what these people are.

Commenting is a privilege and the freedom of expression with regard to claiming privilege (not inalienable right) does not extend to the commenter calling the blog admin an “insane” woman — as this troll has done here.

The Bintang Tiga behaviour of the Jerusubangites has long crossed the line as most regular readers are aware. I label this troll as of Jerusubang origin judging from his track record of past comments.

To date, this blog has received some 18,000 comments. Hence from my experience as moderator, I do have a mental map of commenting patterns. For example, I’m fairly certain that Forrrestcat (a regular) is not Ellese (whom the People’s Parliament blog had wanted to ban) despite the unfathomable and senseless allegations spewed by the Bangsar Malaysia crowd there.

For the record, the vilest comments submitted to this blog have all come from the Jerusubang evangelistas.

As Forrrestcat has suggested in his comment on this thread, it’s high time to let the DAP trolls know that they will not be allowed to get away with their behaviour anymore. Enough is enough.

I had characterized IA’s statement as an “inflammatory call – which is undoubtedly a dangerous incitement”.

I wrote that the Majlis Syura cannot allow Ibrahim Ali to seize the initiative.

I said that to prevent him from succeeding in getting some hotheads to light the bonfire, the PAS people (since they share the same sphere of influence over the conservative/orthodox Muslim constituency) must propose a course of action.

I wrote:

“When we reject and condemn Ibrahim Ali’s incendiary method, we must be able to put on the table a peaceful alternative since the former PAS MP claims that his violent method is “the only way to stop non-Muslims”.

Shu zheng articles are also very complimentary of the DAPsters and their Jerusubangites, PASters mullah and PKR Liberaliwats. i like when he compared Pakatan to barbarians at the gates, pray tell what barbarians do.

what personal slurs? I described you as an “ignorant hypocrite” because you are exactly that. you are ignorant in matters of faith, and you are a hypocritically supporting Islam when you couldn’t care less for God. What is it with MCA that makes you sell yourself so?

These DAPster trolls attack you firstly because you are a woman, even the great Brit, the idols of these DAPsters fell for such cowardice online trolling in these agehttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2268558/How-I-turned-tables-trolls-Mary-Beard-suffered-vile-online-abuse-looks-appearing-Question-Time.html
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Can’t expect better from someone calling himself King Kong, can we? As for the guy calling himself ‘Peace’, sama aje like all those fellas calling themselves Anak Bangsa Malaysia / Malaysian First / Malaysian (patriot lah, whatever lah), their pseudonyms are the biggest hypocrisy. — Helen

1. Your subheading is misleading again :s this time “benci pada yang berdosa”. Christians are called to love the sinners. In fact Christians are also sinners as the Bible said that if anybody said he / she is without sin, then he / she is a liar.

2. It is true that righteousness exalts a nation. In this context, it’s about people regardless of their beliefs, being able to make the right decision in every area. Ie. corrupt leaders (regardless which parties), will not bring the nation forward as where it should be. They’re too busy in their own interest, cronies etc. but when a leader is righteous, the nation can progress forward. Why? Because the leader is able to do what is right for the nation.

3. I see it as nothing wrong for a politician to speak in church in the matters of their faith regardless if they are from govt or opposition.

Since there some 2.2 billion Christians in the world, I doubt that Raja Petra had Peruvian or Lebanese or Finnish Christians in mind when the wrote the article below.

It’s most likely that the Christians who prompted Raja Petra to make his remark about the hypocrisy of claiming to “love the sinner” stems from his experience with Malaysia Today commenters who are mostly urban Chinese/Indians living on the West Coast (i.e. the M2Day demography).

My blog which is 1.5 years old has close to 1.2 million hits and I’ve moderated roughly 19,200 comments. So as web admin, I do have an idea what kind of commenters respond to which article.

Raja Petra’s Malaysia Today which is some 10 years old and really huge (he has been credited with playing a pivotal role in creating the 2008 tsunami) has received received many thousand-fold more comments than has my blog.

Hence compared to me, Raja Petra would be far more familiar with the online (urban/suburban, non-Malay, English-speaking) psyche.

So when Raja Petra opines that “the Christians are the most hypocritical people on earth”, it wouldn’t be amiss to surmise that it is the vast exposure to his own readership of urban Chinese/Indian Christians living on the West Coast – i.e in the anti-establishment states that created the domino effect (Penang, Perak, Selangor, Federal Territory) which have coloured his evaluation.

So is it safe to say that you are assuming that Paul Warren is an Indian Christian? If so, that’s a very dangerous assumption as it may not be true and it brings bad representation to what true Christianity is all about. Hence causing ripple effects from your readers about the negative perception of Christians.

Also, I would like to find out your opinion on my point 2 mentioned above.

So what “very dangerous assumption” do you mean and what do you mean when you say “as it may not be true”?

This is someone I’ve met several times and you’re disputing the evidence of my eyes that he’s Indian?

I may not have known that he’s Malayalee (according to commenter MiNY) since I didn’t cross examine PW on his genealogy. Just as you may not know if a person is Cantonese or Hokkien or Teochew or Hakka.

But at least you’d be aware that the person in front of you is a Chinese (whom you’ve met and conversed with several times). Or do you argue that it is a “very dangerous assumption” to assume the person is a Chinese “as it may not be true”?

I’m not disputing you knowing him as Indian as that’s obvious. Please re-read my question above. How do you know if he’s a Christian? Like I said, there’re many Christians by name and many may not walk in their true faith. Talk about Christians doesn’t make one a Christian. Thank you.

He sounds like a Christian by name but I’m in no position to ascertain whether he or anyone else “walks in their true faith” and furthermore unlike you, I do not possess an examiner’s cert qualifying me to test whether other people are true in their faith and Righteousness.

Since I refuse to spare my time to look up his thousands of online comments to check up on what terms exactly he speaks about Christianity as well as I do not wish to put words into his mouth from [my] memory, you can either do the honours yourself of looking up Malaysiakini or M2Day, or ask him whether he’s a Christian up to your expectations. I was under the impression that he is but then I’m do not possess your exacting standards.

>> Since I refuse to spare my time to look up his thousands of online comments to check up on what terms exactly he speaks about Christianity as well as I do not wish to put words into his mouth from [my] memory…

Hm, that’s a little disappointing, since we all know Helen will trawl all over the internet for a:

– mention by The Star about Hannah Yeoh buried deep in the Metro section
– twitter post by Hannah Yeoh
– twitter post by a person who once walked by by a community line-dance event in Subang Jaya, made a comment, and was retwitted by HY
– lowyat forum post rubbishing her blog
– et cetera

…and write a long winded article about it that takes the whole thing out of context.

Hi Helen, if you are under the impression he is, then your impression might not be 100% accurate. Like you said, “impression”. Hence, to link the way the writes, comments and generalizing Christians that Christians are something like him is unfair ie hypocrites. Likewise for Raja Petra’s example. Just because he encountered bad Christians, doesn’t mean all are hypocrites. Ie. do I generalize all cops as corrupt just because one asked for a bribe from me? I’ve met a few good cops mind you. So I feel writers like yourself and Raja Petra should be wise in wording your statements.

So in future, do refrain from using Christians if you can. Maybe just term as “these Christians by name” ;)

(1) Impressions are formed in a social setting, like if I heard a Malay guy complaining that he had to walk two blocks from [where] he parked his car to (a) the mosque last Friday, I’d assume he’s a practising Muslim but I cannot give you a guarantee that (b) he does not miss any one of his 5 daily prayers.

As for Raja Petra’s generalizations on Christian hypocrisy on “loving the sinner”, you’re demanding that the persons generalized as Christians must pass the equivalent of the (b) benchmark and that the (a) benchmark is not up to par by your high standards.

(2) re: “one bad cop asked for a bribe”

I gave my blog statistics because it is data available to me and my hits counter is on public view display (one reader remembers when it registered 20k-30k page views during this blog’s salad days).

Raja Petra would know his website demography. If I’ve processed 19,200 reader comments over 1-and-1/2 years, it’s fair to say that he’s processed millions over the last 10 years since M2Day started in 2004 and considering how big his website is/was, esp. when it peaked in 2007-2008 before the entry of TMI and FMT crowded his market.

So while you may have met only “one” bad cop, Raja Petra would have ‘met’ far more than one hypocritical Christian for him to make the generalization. I daresay Raja Petra’s sample size is far bigger than the Merdeka Centre’s.

It”s not my high standard. This is what is expected for Christians who really wants to walk in their faith. Therefore it’s different from Christians by name whom may form your statistics or RPK’s. Thank you for taking time off to explain in this busy CNY. May you & RPK encounter the true loving Christians so that you may have a second thought on your perception.

Not that I want to put words into Helen’s reply but if righteousness exalts a nation, then China would not have registered consecutive 7% growth yearly. Humbly I’d suggest not to confuse between competency and righteousness in progressing a nation..:-)